Error during command authentication.

Error - unable to initiate communication with LISTSERV (errno=111). The server is probably not started.

This is the first time I've posted to Hockey-L, but I really want to
relay what I saw during the Cornell/RPI game tonight (concerning the
disputed goals).
 
First of all, the second disputed goal was clearly not a goal...it hit
the post and bounced to the boards.  The light did go on, but that was
probably because of the goal-judges ansiness after the first disputed
goal....
 
Which brings me to the FIRST disputed goal!  I was sitting right behind
the net, and I have to agree with Mr. Lewin that it was clearly a goal.
It seemed to reach the back of the net, even toucing the net, and bounce
out.  If it had not been a goal, and had instead hit the post, the
bounce it would have taken would have been different.
 
People of course will say, "Well, the Cornell players should have kept
playing since the light didn't go on."...
 
Oh, but it did!  The light DID flick on for a second or so.  So,
should't the play have been called dead?  Well, it wasn't, and the
result was an RPI goal on the other end.
 
Did it cost Cornell the game?  I think it may have cost them the tie,
and the series will continue tommorrow.
 
Justin Huyck
Cornell '01
[log in to unmask]
 
 
 
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.